Brexit Thread

[Gilrandir]

You also forgot to subtract the citizens who are too young to vote unless babies can already vote in the UK.

Judging by the result of the referendum they can and they did.

And Leadsom backs out.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...ership-contest

[Pannonian]

He seems like a nice guy but his argumentation is strange.
First he mentions the English being proud of having defended their sovereignty in WW1 and WW2, but then again those people have mostly died out by now. He later says the English/UK people are not nationalist and don't want to hang on to laws made by people who are dead. Why then hang on to the WW2 victories?
His claim that England defended itself from the Lebensraum-ambitions of the Nazis could also hardly be more wrong since the Lebensraum thing didn't apply to the UK at all, it was directed toward the East, Poland and Russia, while the English were seen as fellow aryans.

The argument about where laws come from is just a matter of perspective, according to him, the UK has most laws from appointed (not elected) judges and that is somehow better because it is based on conflict resolution between citizens. But why then criticize the EC for not being elected but appointed law makers if your own judges are just the same? Meanwhile judges make quite a few decisions which basically become law in other European countries as well, so I'm not even sure if the difference is as big as he makes it out to be. Going by the British argument that the British parliament is elected while the EC is not, I'd assumed that the parliament is a very important law maker in Britain as well.

If there's one thing I have learned, it's that you island people do indeed see the world differently, but I'm not sure if that is as positive a thing as you think. So as I said before, maybe it's better that you do leave so we can move forward and you can do whatever it is that you want to do. It's just sad for the 48% of UK citizens who just have to live with that, but otherwise it'd be 52% who'd have to do that I guess.

When Virginia voted to leave the Union, the western bit broke off as they wanted to remain inside.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

When Virginia voted to leave the Union, the western bit broke off as they wanted to remain inside.

We handled the whole thing rather quasi-legally (or expediently and the laws be damned if you prefer).

Union Position: Secession is illegal as there is no provision for it in the Constitution. But if you want to secede from a Rebel Secession state, that is just hunky-dory by us.

Confederate Position: A procedure to join in as a new state implies the right of the state to depart though no procedure is specified. We want out.

Resolution: Fight a war, amateurishly, and kill 600-800k soldiers and civilians, mostly by disease. Union position adopted by right of conquest.

[Greyblades]

I was going with the idea that the referendum is representative. If you'd say it is not, then I'd argue the UK shouldn't leave based on what only 26% of the population want. You also forgot to subtract the citizens who are too young to vote unless babies can already vote in the UK.

The word "citizen" includes the young, the incapable, even the criminal. You seemed to be giving the impression that 48% of everyone in the country actively didn't want to leave.

Well, tell that to the guy in the video who said law in the UK was/is made from the bottom by the people/courts whereas in continental Europe it's a Napoleonic top-down approach.

I'm at work an lacking headphones so I cannot comment on the video beyond what the auto-generated subtitles tell me, but it sort of is.

What I learned from taking a Law A-level 5 years ago is that in the British common law a court set precedent can change the meaning of a law; where every judge/lawyer from then on says "the last judge on your level facing this sort of circumstance said it was interpreted thus; unless you can say the circumstance is significantly different here you must do the same now" with only a bit of wriggle room to avoid absurdity.

Essentially Common Law allows there to be an automatically growing library of instructions for each situation the law applies to that the original document might not have accounted for.

On the other hand Civil Law based on what was used in Napoleonic France have judges who are free to ignore previous cases and instead have to work off the wording of the original document of law. Civil Law relies less on what the judges who came before decided to do in the same situation, and more how many eventualities the men writing the law thought to account for.

Every time something unexpected comes up the Civil courts ends up having to figure it out themselves and have to keep doing that until the government sets down a new rule, resulting in the law only being changeable from the highest level.

Common law can change from bottom up: a magistrate (the lowest rank of judge; and easiest for the common man to become) can tweak a law's use nation wide unless overruled through appeal in a higher court, whereas in civil law the lower courts cant affect the law outside the immediate case, only the parliament/senate/whatever can do so.

TL:DR Common vs Napoleonic is Flexibility vs Uniformity. Change can be Bottom up rather than Top down in British Law.

Fun fact: Napoleon was on the other side of that dynamic when it came to military practices. His enemies' armies, in particular the Prussians, were hamstrung due to inflexibility in comparison to Napoleon's.
I wonder if he ever appreciated the Irony after the code was developed.

[InsaneApache]

[HopAlongBunny]

Looks like May is PM:

http://ca.reuters.com/article/topNew...0ZR19P?sp=true

Is a non-binding referendum enough for Britain to actually leave the EU?

[Gilrandir]

I'm at work an lacking headphones

It is outrageous! What does your boss think he is doing? No headphones nor privacy for an employee to pay attention to what really matters (unlike those stupid job resposibilities). This is all EU bureaucracy's fault. But now when you have Brexited things will change. You will be able to indulge in internet chatting as much as you like and no one from Brussels will boss you around.

[Greyblades]

The Joys of zero hour contracts, where productivity is punished by the fact that once the work is done they stop paying you, but too little productivity and they can call someone else in to do your job. I'm stuck walking the tightrope of efficiency, and that's when there's any work at all, Brussels did jack to stop such becoming widespread.

Fortunately I have a good boss that helps me avoid insanity in repeptetive work by allowing breaks, probably should be using those breaks better.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

First of all, to those who are confused by Greyblades' comments on that video - that's because Greyblades is wrong.

Let's deal with the point one by one.

1. "We Won the War" or, how we see Europe. Unlike the other nations of Europe we were neither aggressor now victim in either world War and ther is a sense that, perhaps, we could have stayed out of both and kept our Empire, or at least have disposed of it with more grace. Instead, millions of our men were killed and maimed so that France remained France, Belgium Belgium and Poland Poland. Our view of Europe has, therefore, more in common with the US than with either France or Germany. We are essentially immune to both the French sense of vulnerability or the german sense of Guilt. To ask why we still "harp on" about the war is like asking why the Germans still have war-guilt that prevents them deploying troops en masse even in peacekeeping efforts despite the size of the German army. Nor do we have hangups over Russia from being part of the Warsaw Pact.

In essence - we have no psychological investment in the EU, only a desire to trade

2. The British, especially English, legal system was built up from the bottom, Roman and Napoleonic law was codified at the top. While it's true that French judges interpret the legal code and the English Parliament makes laws the difference is in the way our laws were developed. French/Roman Law was created when a group of jurists sat down and attempted to codify a legal system to cover all eventualities, this law was then interpreted by judges and sent back to the legislature for amendment. In the British system the law is created by judges when they hear cases, it is then sometimes refined by Parliament but the crucial difference is that rather than senior jurists in Paris or Rome deciding the shape of the law the law is instead decided by a local judge in a small town, and it then filters up through the courts as the decision is applied and then appealed. As the decision is appealed it passes from Magistrate, to District Court, to High Court, to Appeals Court and finally to the Law Lords.

So, in the British system law is created by judges as needed which is why the British press will make a thing out of EU regulations defining the difference between a Class 1 and Class 2 cucumber - this is not a necessary regulation (they taste the same) and therefore its imposition is the imposition of a foreign concept. Interestingly, since we joined the EU we have seen the Law Society try to "codify" our legal system through "repeal acts" that seeks to "clean" the Statue Book of laws no longer deemed applicable.

Another example that deeply offended people at the time was the metrication of coinage, and then of weights and measures. This was, at the time, an entirely top-down imposition which had no benefit to the British people - not least because metric measures actually tend to be less precise (a 30th of a inch is smaller and a millimetre, for example).

3. Finally, we have the language and movement issue. It is completely true that the British are, along with the Americans, inflicted with a peculiar handicap. Being British abroad is a study in embarrassment if you are not a complete oaf. You pull out a phrase book, or you try to speak in the language you learned in school only to be met with "oh, you're English!". I feel sorry for the Scots and welsh - but aside from that the fact is that children soon get wise to this and don't bother much with other languages in school. At the same time, Britain is an attractive destination for everyone else in Europe because you all speak out language and can get on and find a job without that barrier.

at the same time, we DO have an issue of overcrowding, and people ask "we are we allowing more people in when we can't even house our own people and find jobs for them?"

It's a legitimate question.

To be clear - he's talking as much about British perception, as reality.

[Husar]

To ask why we still "harp on" about the war is like asking why the Germans still have war-guilt that prevents them deploying troops en masse even in peacekeeping efforts despite the size of the German army.

I need to sleep now but thanks for the explanations.

The quote was amusing to read, as just this week the Dutch announced that they will retreat from Mali.
And our government was quite annoyed because it means we may have to retreat as well as we depend 100% on Dutch helicopters for everything that requires helicopters, such as patrol support or flying out wounded soldiers. Our army may be big in size and may also be ready to take on a ground assault in Germany, but it's incedibly ill-equipped to operate outside Germany. There were even reports about problems with sea rescue as the army used to provide the helicopters for that but their fleet is so old that some 90% or so of it can't fly anymore and the NH-90 keeps getting delayed because somehow it ended up with a dozen major design flaws or so and wouldn't be able to operate properly in its current state...

By the way, a micrometer and a nanometer are smaller than a 30th of an inch.

[Greyblades]

First of all, to those who are confused by Greyblades' comments on that video - that's because Greyblades is wrong.

I recognize my understanding of the matter is flawed. Would it be possible for you to walk me through it? I am not entirely sure which bits I got wrong and leaving me to figure it out myself is likely to just give me a different, equally wrong idea.

[CrossLOPER]

By the way, a micrometer and a nanometer are smaller than a 30th of an inch.

Please, please you are being too practical. You don't want to be like those scientists, do you?

[Kralizec]

By the way, a micrometer and a nanometer are smaller than a 30th of an inch.

Apparently there are 12 inches in a foot, 3 feet in a yard and 1760 yard in a mile....or 63360 inch. Yep, clearly better than the metric system in many ways.

AFAIK among British and American scientists and engineers metric units have been used since time immemorial...but those are experts, and Michael Gove says that Britain has had enough of them

[Brenus]

"The British, especially English, legal system was built up from the bottom" And I though that the Magna Carta, base of the entire legal system in UK I was told, was imposed to the King by the Barons... Your bottom is not that deep...
And by the way, you should go to the Ceremony held in a Church were new and old Judges show the Sovereign's power... The symbolic is quite telling...

[Husar]

Apparently there are 12 inches in a foot, 3 feet in a yard and 1760 yard in a mile....or 63360 inch. Yep, clearly better than the metric system in many ways.

AFAIK among British and American scientists and engineers metric units have been used since time immemorial...but those are experts, and Michael Gove says that Britain has had enough of them

Ok, now you gave me an excuse to post this again:

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

"The British, especially English, legal system was built up from the bottom" And I though that the Magna Carta, base of the entire legal system in UK I was told, was imposed to the King by the Barons... Your bottom is not that deep...
And by the way, you should go to the Ceremony held in a Church were new and old Judges show the Sovereign's power... The symbolic is quite telling...

No, that's just the first Statute, English Law, as you well know, predates Magna Carta by several centuries.

Ok, now you gave me an excuse to post this again:

Except, as he demonstrated, it does all hang together. Nobody uses all those measures, people use some of them depending on what they're doing, and all those measures were applicable in their given context.

For example, a Nautical Mile was originally 1/60th of the distance between two lines of latitude, which makes it useful for traditional navigation using the sun and starts - now it isn't, so if you use a modern Nautical Mile and a Sextant you're going to have odd numbers.

A League in Imperial (on land) in three statute miles, which is about what a man can walk in an hour carry a pack/leading a pack horse. Therefore, a distance of 8 Leagues can be understood as a day's walk.

Interestingly (and I just discovered this) a Roman League is 1.5 Roman miles, which means a Roman League is roughly the distance you can walk in half an hour because the Romans had miles 5% shorter than Statue Mile, and they generally reckoned you covered ground somewhat faster than in later periods.

[Husar]

Except, as he demonstrated, it does all hang together. Nobody uses all those measures, people use some of them depending on what they're doing, and all those measures were applicable in their given context.

For example, a Nautical Mile was originally 1/60th of the distance between two lines of latitude, which makes it useful for traditional navigation using the sun and starts - now it isn't, so if you use a modern Nautical Mile and a Sextant you're going to have odd numbers.

A League in Imperial (on land) in three statute miles, which is about what a man can walk in an hour carry a pack/leading a pack horse. Therefore, a distance of 8 Leagues can be understood as a day's walk.

Interestingly (and I just discovered this) a Roman League is 1.5 Roman miles, which means a Roman League is roughly the distance you can walk in half an hour because the Romans had miles 5% shorter than Statue Mile, and they generally reckoned you covered ground somewhat faster than in later periods.

Amazing.
How many sextants are used to fly an aeroplane from London to New York?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Amazing.
How many sextants are used to fly an aeroplane from London to New York?

None - but if your computer breaks in the middle of the Atlantic and your pocket calculator falls overboard you'll be cursing the metric system whilst you're there with charts and tables, repeatedly carrying the one.

The point is, all he did to "rubbish" the Imperial system was reel off all the different sub-divisions, he spent no time talking about why they all exist. That could have been a really interesting video.

For example, a Nautical Mile is is 1/60th of the distance between two line of latitude, or one navigational Minute, this is then divided into 10 cables, Cables being a usable measure at see. So, if you know the location of one ship and then run a cable to another ship, and take a bearing, you can likewise detmine the location of the other ship even without making any observations from it. This has navigational implications with regard to undersea hazards and is generally useful.

By contrast, the Statue mile is 1/3 of a League on land, which is the distance a man can walk in an hour. One explanation for the variation of the length of a mile is the difficulty in traversing the ground (and therefore the time taken) in different parts of the country.

The point is, for many day-to-day activities Imperial works better than metric, it arguably even works better when you're building a house, say, because Imperial works on multiples of 12 and so do degrees.

But no, he just rubbished the system by referring to a medieval English Statue that defines an incg in relation to three dry barley corns.

[Gilrandir]

Your bottom is not that deep...

Now, Husar, do you still think low of my reading of Vodafone?

For example, a Nautical Mile was originally 1/60th of the distance between two lines of latitude, which makes it useful for traditional navigation using the sun and starts - now it isn't, so if you use a modern Nautical Mile and a Sextant you're going to have odd numbers.

For example, a Nautical Mile is is 1/60th of the distance between two line of latitude, or one navigational Minute, this is then divided into 10 cables, Cables being a usable measure at see. So, if you know the location of one ship and then run a cable to another ship, and take a bearing, you can likewise detmine the location of the other ship even without making any observations from it. This has navigational implications with regard to undersea hazards and is generally useful.

For God's sake, let them Leave.

[Kralizec]

For example, a Nautical Mile is is 1/60th of the distance between two line of latitude, or one navigational Minute, this is then divided into 10 cables, Cables being a usable measure at see. So, if you know the location of one ship and then run a cable to another ship, and take a bearing, you can likewise detmine the location of the other ship even without making any observations from it. This has navigational implications with regard to undersea hazards and is generally useful.

By contrast, the Statue mile is 1/3 of a League on land, which is the distance a man can walk in an hour. One explanation for the variation of the length of a mile is the difficulty in traversing the ground (and therefore the time taken) in different parts of the country.

The modern nautical mile is derived from the metric system: it's defined as exactly 1852 metres whereas you can only give an approximate conversion in yards or feet. It was established at an international convention and is included in the SI system, the traditional imperial unit is obsolete.

Having 1.000 different kind of measurements for different crafts and professions might be beneficial for those people themselves, but not for others who are trying to make sense of it. If I want to buy a rope, it would be much preferable to measure it in a unit that is clear and understandable to everyone rather than some arbitrary measurement that's only relevant to salesmen in the 17th century. In a few cases (such as the nautical mile) it might be worth to use a non-typical measurement, but otherwise it's much preferable to use universal, decimal units.

I wonder why I bothered to reply though...PVC seems to ignore my posts.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The modern nautical mile is derived from the metric system: it's defined as exactly 1852 metres whereas you can only give an approximate conversion in yards or feet. It was established at an international convention and is included in the SI system, the traditional imperial unit is obsolete.

Yes, I am aware of this - I was pointing out that the traditional Nautical Mile is not, in fact, an "Imperial" unit but a navigational one ultimately determined by the diameter of the Earth. The Modern Nautical Mile is an arbitrary metric measurement, this is preferable when using a computer but disadvantageous when using a Sextant and chart.

Obviously, in an age of GPS the modern Nautical Mile is more convenient, but if your GPS goes down and you have to rely on a chart, Sextant and and a piece of paper for your sums you suddenly have to work with bits of numbers.

Having 1.000 different kind of measurements for different crafts and professions might be beneficial for those people themselves, but not for others who are trying to make sense of it. If I want to buy a rope, it would be much preferable to measure it in a unit that is clear and understandable to everyone rather than some arbitrary measurement that's only relevant to salesmen in the 17th century. In a few cases (such as the nautical mile) it might be worth to use a non-typical measurement, but otherwise it's much preferable to use universal, decimal units.

In practice the Imperial System uses yards, feet, and inches for most measurements. Despite what that video implies most of the other measures are either nautical (and therefore only applied at see) or they are measurements "of record", used in land deeds and they are standardisations of common practice.

For example, paces. Say you were going to buy a house and, when first viewing the property, you want to know how long the garden is. You pace it out, you'll get a surveyor in to check everything with fixed measures later before you buy, but first thing you do is pace it out, because you know how long your pace is. So, naturally, when you get the surveyor's report it's in standardised paces and multiples of paces (rods and chains).

Given how many people have trouble visualising area and volume an anthropomorphic measure is useful even if a measure of mm is more accurate. The last part is debatable, though, as an inch rule is usually divided into 1/32 of an inch, which is smaller than a mm.

I wonder why I bothered to reply though...PVC seems to ignore my posts.

In response to your previous post - did you know you can half a mile 32 time and still retain a measure in whole inches? 55", to be exact, and you can divide it again (64 times) for 27 1/2". Division of a kilometre 64 times gives 15.625cm.

[Gilrandir]

If I want to buy a rope, it would be much preferable to measure it in a unit that is clear and understandable to everyone rather than some arbitrary measurement that's only relevant to salesmen in the 17th century.

What? You want to drop ells and fathoms?

[CrossLOPER]

though, as an inch rule is usually divided into 1/32 of an inch, which is smaller than a mm

I am convinced that, at some point, you were replaced with a chatbot.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I am convinced that, at some point, you were replaced with a chatbot.

I just don't sound as pithy when not smacking a religious fanatic.

Look, I take iss ue with the contention that the Imperial measure is based on "barleycorns" and I take issue with someone pretending to be intelligent whilst rattling off all the various different Imperial Measures. I'm not saying the Imperial system is more or less accurate, or that we should use Imperial for everything. I merely pointed out that the Imperial measures are more useful in certain contexts and have certain advantages.

Imperial measures are always easier to divide into fractions, a 32nd of an Inch IS smaller than a millimetre and back when everything was in Imperial all measurements, like the length and diameter of screws, were in fractions of an inch which were marks on an inch rule.

A half-inch bolt is a simpler measure to work with than a 12.7mm one. Of course, it's all arbitary anyway - if we had used a Metric system originally we'd just have 15mm bolts and 10mm bolts.

Before you chortle too much at the "barleycorns" though you should think about WHY we didn't start with a base-ten system and why one had to be invented arbitrarily.

[Husar]

A half-inch bolt is a simpler measure to work with than a 12.7mm one. Of course, it's all arbitary anyway - if we had used a Metric system originally we'd just have 15mm bolts and 10mm bolts.

Exactly, a 1000th of a millimeter is also smaller than a 32nd of an inch...

Before you chortle too much at the "barleycorns" though you should think about WHY we didn't start with a base-ten system and why one had to be invented arbitrarily.

That may all have been valid in the middle ages but we now live in the 21st century.
I still wonder how you're going to use a sextant from the cockpit of an airplane by the way.
The base 10 system is a lot easier to use and the old system was even more arbitrary given that not every barley corn has exactly the same size. A meter always has the same size unlike the distance a person can walk in a day.

[Greyblades]

That may all have been valid in the middle ages but we now live in the 21st century.

Insert John Oliver "it's current year" meme here

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Exactly, a 1000th of a millimeter is also smaller than a 32nd of an inch...

Jolly hard to mark on a ruler, though - I have me steel rule here with me and it's obvious the Imperial side is more accurate than the Metric one, not by a huge amount but it's clearly visible to the naked eye. So, if I was minded to, say, build a cabinet I'd use the Imperial side.

That may all have been valid in the middle ages but we now live in the 21st century.

It's just as valid today if you don't have a calculator - Imperial is often easier to do in your head. It also exercises the brain - there was a noticeable drop in the scores in the Maths O-Level after Britain abandoned Charlemagne's denarius-based coinage. The fact we were persuaded to do so by the French and Germans is somewhat ironic.

I still wonder how you're going to use a sextant from the cockpit of an airplane by the way.

And I'm still not saying you are, although apparently the jokes on you because they did.

https://timeandnavigation.si.edu/nav...air/challenges

The base 10 system is a lot easier to use and the old system was even more arbitrary given that not every barley corn has exactly the same size. A meter always has the same size unlike the distance a person can walk in a day.

Well, the old system was taken from the length of Henry I's arm, so it's actually based on the Body of a King (and therefore ordained by God). This explains why the EU wanted us to get rid of it, because the Metric system was created by mere men.

[Gilrandir]

So, if I was minded to, say, build a cabinet I'd use the Imperial side.

It is a matter of taste, not of precision/imprecision of either system. Each system's unit is liable to fracturing and it is no use to argue which fracturing is better. Though I don't understand what part of your cabinet would be 1/32 of an inch.

It's just as valid today if you don't have a calculator - Imperial is often easier to do in your head. It also exercises the brain

Either counting exercises the brain, but if you meant that the imperial system exercises the brain MORE than the metric one, then the two sentences contradict each other. It is like saying that lifting a small weight is easier and it exercises your muscles better that lifting a great weight.

[Idaho]

The Joys of zero hour contracts, where productivity is punished by the fact that once the work is done they stop paying you, but too little productivity and they can call someone else in to do your job. I'm stuck walking the tightrope of efficiency, and that's when there's any work at all, Brussels did jack to stop such becoming widespread.

Fortunately I have a good boss that helps me avoid insanity in repeptetive work by allowing breaks, probably should be using those breaks better.

Seriously? So you are a tory Brexiter on a zero hours contract and you blame the EU for this? That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard all week... And it's been a ridiculous week.

You really have no idea who your enemies are.

[Greyblades]

...you think I am a Tory? Worst mind reader ever.